Zevachim 57

Today's and we will begin at the Mishna on the we're moving along in parake discussing different it says the like all their doesn't have to be rather It could be anywhere in the Azor. But in contrast to a carbon that requires four and in contrast to that is you have to make sure that that one mat is on a part of the that has underneath it. Although we lump the pes together, it's only with regards to the that they are similar. But in terms of the different how so can only be eaten by can be eaten by anybody. Additionally, they can be eaten anywhere in the city in any way, not only roasted. What about the garb? It too has its own in terms of how it's eaten. It could only be eaten at night, which is because ordinarily have to be brought during the day. Allan had to be brought during the day and certainly that day you were allowed to eat the carbon. The question is what about the night after and what about the following day? But in terms of the day that the carbon was brought, there's no such thing that you can't eat from a carbon on the day that you brought it with the exception of the carbon pes. The carbon pes was brought during the day of Pes and it was eaten only at night the night of Pes can only be eaten until of the night of Pes you had to RSVP in order to be able to eat from a carbon and finally it's not eaten in any way but rather man who's the says that the of and the of are the same. The Mishna said the only difference between them is with regards to the laws of but as it relates to this they're all together who's the talks about the so the uses a len now the reason the Torah uses a lushian rabin discussing the bakar is because there's different types of for which you need to give that firstborn over to the Pik says. So it's regarding the the animals that the talks but differently said that is coming not to describe the Russian to the but rather it's referring to another type of carbon that's not mentioned in that it's coming to where the Torah amazingly does not specifically mention it's doesn't say anywhere that there's a doesn't say anywhere there's a by carbon how do you know by how do you know by carbon it's learned out from the lion that the use when it discussed the it's from the we learned but what's the point if and learned out from Bakar. So it makes sense that the laws of miser should mirror the laws of Bakar. So our Mishna that says have the same laws of it's only it's the we are they go in separate directions. But as far as the same said this is going according to who said that and for that matter but of I learned out from I learned out from then it makes sense it should have the same Mishna said that only require one but you have to make sure that that one mat is how do you know that we learn it from how do you know that the carbon It's how to be says learn from. Now this gum is really a reference to the we saw in the beginning of the week where the said it says three times regarding and the third one the is maybe coming to teach me not regarding the but rather regarding the and that is the also needs that needs but if you remember the rejected it the rejected it based on a two had his kiba had his What's the is the suggested maybe the is said it's discussing and it's only over there that there's whether but otherwise everybody holds but the point is the rejected it. It was a so rashi asks the kasha and rashi that really if you remember if you know that the came out that the is not learned out from this is coming to teach me something else. It's learned out from but regardless the is that requires and we learn from that and also require if we're going to learn from let's why is it that only once I'll tell you why because how do you know because the says so I'll ask you why did the to teach me. It says it already. So why not learn from? You know what you have? So essentially you have a didn't by the and it says by the carbon as well. Once the says sub twice, he can't learn anymore from either one of them because anytime the mentions You can bet that the next line is going to be this right because it's a one always does. So that's all good if you hold but that holds. So according to that there's nothing wrong with learning from that just like it has and we're learning the say that just like has but says also says so now you already have the say and so three times the terra mentions this idea that it has to be of everybody agrees. You can't learn that they're going to have a even though you learn you saw it but you do not learn the of that is how do you know that it's treated like and it can be eaten for two days and a night I mean on the one hand you see it's only and the fact that it's only it suggests that it's like kachi kadash kachi kadash was only eaten for a day and a night stating that the is that it was eaten for two days and a night says to how do you know that it's not that it says regarding the it should be treated like of the carbon it should be treated like the is a reference to the part of the carbon that was given to the kay and that's what the saying that give Just like you give the carbon to the but the bottom line is the we say just like was eaten for two days and a night because it's how do you know that was eaten for two days and a night? It's learned out from a it's a heckish. It says says the gar that although this is a very straightforward but there's hashtag rest of the story to this sha how do you know that is eaten for two days in a night was posed to the rabbis the who was sitting in the so we know that after The second basikt was destroyed. So the Sanhedrin had been in exile and at that time it was stationed in Yavnak famously told the in the story of when he was asked for three wishes pain was so that's where the were so the is going to give us a little glimpse the will some insight a scene in caring. So the Shiloh was brought in front of the was there. He gets up and he says there was a young ber who had come. This was his first day in Bish and his name was none other than he says respectfully how do you know that is he told him I'll explain it to you very simple it's just like is eaten for two days in a night which is also going to be eaten for two days in a I can argue that just like which is only eaten by has to be eaten only for a day and a night. So maybe which is analogous to it because it too could only be eaten by kayanim. It should also only be eaten for a day and a night. Meaning you want to tell me which is column to be eaten for two days and a night. It makes sense that should also be eaten for two days in a night. I could take the matu in another direction. I could draw a parallel between and in the sense that both are given both could only be so say just like over there it's a day and night here too. It should be a day and night. draw the maybe I'll tell you why it makes more sense to draw the parallel between they're both similar that as opposed to therefore we'll say just like is eaten for two days in the So was persistent. He didn't let up. So you said I can argue that no maybe learn it more from two parallels. Number one, they're both getting completed to the number two. both. So say so and are going back and forth is from the elder statesman in the car is a young ber he's asking very good he's giving a run for his money says the spring he jumped up moved aside took over it says And what's the end of the he told them the started with them when the says give the to the it says give it to the just like you give the so the terra coming from aish the terra was to so just like is eaten for two days in a night this two should eat for two days and a night didn't let off the hook so easy either. He told him, "How do you know that when the says that the should be like the it means of the which is eaten for two days and a night? Maybe it means the and the of the carbon which was a form of schlam which was also given to the and that was only eaten for a day and a night because in contrast to an ordinary schlom which was eaten for two days and a night we saw the mishna the and the of the which was a schlam are two examples of schlams that were eaten for a day and a night but the bottom line is maybe we're being toy we're being so said, "I hear, maybe you're right, but it says twice that the bosser of the second time is superflous. It wasn't necessary." Why did the say to tell me that you're right? based on the I would think maybe it's which means you only have one day to eat it. It says a second time to tell me not that you give it to the because I know you give it to the but the has a little bit more time to eat it and to enjoy it. He has not one day to eat it but rather he's going to have two days to eat it. Either way, this was the exchange. So was asked what's this? He said it's two days and a night based on this is a young gives a hard time the says I know from asks him I don't know if the heck is maybe the heck is to say even if the I still have a I still know it's going to be two days in a night says Rabish was given a transcript of what transpired in Karen He sent and he said go tell you made a mistake meaning you entertained the suggestion of this that when the says that maybe the is not to but it's to stating that you still know it's two days in a night is there's no way in the world that the could be to you know why because How do you know that you're supposed to take the of and give it to it doesn't say you know it the whole idea that you're supposed to take and give it to the so how can I learn from if I goof learn from this is 101ish so is not to but rather If that's the case, it's posit that this wasn't a was right like he had suggested originally like the brought the Ber right on the top of the and that you know that I know it from the in other words told him don't go with that the is but I have a boy that even though is a day and a night I know a second day the he is my in his used second time the says to teach me that even though you have two days to eat it not just one day said the heck is just it's not so what then does he do with those words of the we had this earlier in the so is coming to tell me that also goes to ordinarily a is off limits when it comes to You don't find any weird DNA or even give to a anything that's special that is given to a and I know it from the extra know that it says what does mean the is referring to the different types of animals that could be aarif as the discussed in great detail in the beginning of per bottom line. So we had here a regarding that it's the suggested had that maybe learn from but the told it's you're not going to be able to learn it from so even though you're not learning from you can learn from a what's the it says but there was a was that when it says we're to to the carbon is so the was that maybe is not of the but rather of the who were also given to the and is only eaten for a day and a night but it doesn't matter because being that it says it's a second day on top of that had gone initially with the lash but then was persuaded to go with the and sends a message You can't go with why not because now agrees that everybody knows that that's 101. What's the right that we're going to learn from from says the arguing in a detail in the that's can't be. So if I know A because I was to B, it can't teach me C. I something that I only know can't be. But what if I have a that the Torah mentions but there's a detail of that I only know. Could it be? So I know the raw basic generic notes but the with all its intricacies there are details if a that I only know do you still say that it's or not and is an example of that because the fact that the of the goes to the that's not the that I only know from but the fact that a is only eaten for a day and night that is the so if you want to now learn from the so the em is do I look at the of the fact that it's only eaten for a day and a night on the one hand the fact that the was given to the that is aish but the fact that it's eaten for a day and a night that's in the and that was the sh was give a hell this wasn't an issue of because the entire is not it's only a detail in that's the fact that is for a day and a night which at the end of the day is what we're going to now apply to that I know that's the you're right the is learning it from and the fact that that goes to the is but it's only partially that's not as it relates to no at the end of the day part of this has to come on to and that's enough to say that I can't learn it says the I have two other examples of precedent where you find in such a sh where you have in the context of where only a detail of it is says and we learn from So we know that on Yamipper there were special thee were and as a result in addition to the were done on the there were also that were done on the there were also that were entered. How many were done? So, eight with the eight with the eight with the dama on the eight with the on the each set of eight was. Now the fact that there was both from the dham and the is not in the I know it because but it's based on that knows that the fact that on the there was also from the respectively I also know from the says that what you're supposed to do you should doing that you should doing that is if you think about it, it's a problem cuz don't we have a which can't be how do I know it's all how do I know that just like you do that in that there's a problem says if you're going to tell me that so it's very It's not a problem because the basic idea that there's a details of it that I have to come on to the heckish for okay that's not who had a problem with the cuz once You're learning even one detail in the law from it's not how do you know the soar says it's not two different the between the teaches me is akish between the second heish is between and it's two different you can't learn from Sawyer and then apply to something else. That's not what I'm doing. One is akish between the other is akish between the two are traveling on two different roads. It's two different heckishes. As a result, that's not an issue. Alternatively, it's true that you can't learn, but over there, let's say it would be true. Noish. So, I wouldn't know by the only knowled but I would be able to know that there's in I that I for sure would know I would even know there's what I wouldn't know is because that detail I only know from but let's take away the detail that's only learned from the basic that is That's not learned out from that's in the and then I could know from my own. So once I use the heish to teach me what I could use I can now slop along these details of the heish as well. However, in our case, when you want to learn from without the he obviously I can't learn it from because the whole fact that the goes to the that's the one that just like the goes to the it just like the goes to the so the fact that the go to the only so without the I can't get on to first base I don't have anything but I I have the without the I have something I have it with regards to the just like this and the as well. You're right. I can't learn every because in order to learn every I have to come on to the between the how could I learn from a hkish? Something that was learned from a hkish. Okay. But something I could learn once I could learn something. So I could learn everything else as well. But in terms of our and our that's much worse because without the there's no you're going to tell me that just like the that's it doesn't even start. The only that I know by without the is that it's not but the is talking specifically about the therefore it's not going to work but asks another one other where you run into this idea of where it's only a detail that's so the context over there is so the guy with the carbon there were 40 breads that were brought Some were some were matzah and the garumar is discussing how much bread needed to be for the to be we learn it out from the that was brought on. So let's see the lemon the context over there is the was brought on it's coming to teach me that the shear of the breads of should be applied to other breads that were brought so just like each bread had to be that was the so to the other breads also had to bear. So that's how you know the had to bear. Maybe the way to make the is just like being that each one was and together they were. So maybe the being that each bread they were there were 40 breads. So maybe each group of breads all 10 together should equal up to two. Okay. So I can learn from the what about the 10? How do I learn that from the negative? I have another heish. Bottom line is is I know the shear of the mat component of from the shear of the component of the and I know the shear of the component of the from the so that's being so if you're going to tell me that it's only a detail it's the okay that it's only a detail that I'm learning it's not a problem but according says that even a detail is a heish in the sense that it can't be the says it's not learned out from that if you go through this properly all these are not it's a heish if you're working with the one of the that's calledish that's when you run into this issue but over here we're not learning it from the as a result the is that it's not heckish not heck is nothing to do with Exhale. So before we go right there so we just mention now the we've been learning about so just two the first is that the Mishna and mention so the carbon title was eaten and that's in contrast to almost all other column the Other exception is the aisle but ordinarily was eaten for two days and a night. The carbonid was different. The carbonid was only eaten for a day and a night. Why? Why is the carbon different than ordinary? is says he says the reason is because the purpose of the carbon was like we mentioned last night and it's not only but like says in like that anytime a person felt an urge to give because of some wonderful thing that Hashem did for him some miracle he was right that any ishua that a person had he would go to the bdash and he would bring a carbon tie and today we have more during maybe you throw maybe that's the rem but the point is that once upon a time you'd go to the and you would bring a carbon you would bring a carbon so the purpose of the carbon is to give it's for that reason you find that carbon was a bigger carbon but was a shorter time. You know why? Cuz a person who's a carbon is bring animal and there's carbs all over the place. You have 40 breads, right? It's you know whole wheat, whatever. But there's a lot of there's a lot of food going around. How you going to eat all this? You have one night to eat it. It has to be eaten. You can't have leftovers, you know, sitting on the table the next morning. This has to be uh for the island to clean up. This has to be eaten. THERE'S NO OTHER WAY. It has to be gotten rid of. So what are you going to do? You're going to be forced to invite people. You're going to be forced to bring in a and that's the only way it's going to be eaten. By doing that, you're going to end up being to your going to be pursuing which is essentially at its core what the carbon is all about. So it says that if you want to know why the said that this man of a carbon should be only a day and a night. The reason is is because the wanted to be the have a very big carbon with very short time to eat it. Inevitably you're going to be forced to bring people and if you're going to be forced to bring people that's what's going to end up happening. I was thinking along the same lines maybe that's why the carbon p was also eaten. We're going to see in a moment cuz the of course all about it was only supposed to be you were supposed to get together. You have a very short time to eat. If you'd have more time to eat it, but if you have you have to be done by you have to have a big sed everybody has to be sitting together. That's the idea. It's all about pursuing on the bottom. He says so it's a long piece but the the crux is says when do you find anywhere that a person had to bring a carving you just don't find that a person had an obligation to bring a carbon he says if anything if you would ask me I would think about snail you're bringing a carbon Well, you have to put a whole world has to know that that you're bringing a carbon. It's very nice. It should be between you and this is why what's the emphasis of because we're talking not just about any carbon. We're talking about the carbon when it comes to the carbon is all about pursuing and that's why we're doing it in this way. That's the first order. Second order regarding is the Mishna had said twice. So the that was by Cayanim was given to the cayanim but the could eat it his wife could eat it his sons can eat it and his slaves could eat it. So this asks the wise should say vine ben k is a k she's only anious ken she has a dinner with regards to for example an is but why do what's this emphasis of why would you think that a ben would be any different than a k we're talking about a and you would have thought that maybe a is different is okay makes the same obviously we're talking about and he says clearly thatim that are allowed to eat from the I don't understand how's a allowed to eat. Isn't it a mitzvah to eat? And you would think that every kaz of that's eating mitzvah. So if a now goes ahead and eats it, isn't the matzvah? So if the is being mitzvah, it shouldn't be okay for him to eat it. How could a now the truth is this is the that we spoke about night and we spoke spoke about weak and that is that the is that the is true forum as well not like it's safe from mitzvah not like the brisk and safe from etc etc but the is that when the ram says is a mitzvah Even though he brings it primarily by but it's true for it's true forum as well which could be eaten even by how could he eat it isn't say he says that the mitzvah of is like all mitzvah like mitzvah the mitzvah to eat a gazayas once you eat a gaz got the muskuna he got a whole big piece of flesh he eats a gazayas he's at that point there's no mitzvah anymore the only issue is you have to make sure that the boss gets eaten. So it shouldn't be nicer. But in terms of a mitzvah that you don't have that you don't have a mitzvah, it's okay. You can give it to a cut to eat it. It's not going to it's not going to be an issue. But the iss that we've spoken about from the and the mitzvah of is not a mitzvah that's the god go do a the mitzvah is to make sure that the buster of the carbon is just like you have to make sure the dam has is and the has a you have to make sure the buster has an said that's why if someone has a is pickle that two people are going to eat that two people are going to eat it cuz it's good ah you never find that That's because ordinarily you need the here you just need the result that the was so therefore there possible it's bottom line is is that if you don't need the you just need it to be maybe even if it was eaten by a maybe that would be enough not sure but I'll regardless we have one more and it's a festive said that what's of it's really just like when it says by the carbonus it meant because that's where makus took place. So too with regards to doesn't it say you could eat and what does mean till the morning why then does it say I would have thought I would have thought it should be treated like that can for sure be eaten during the day it could only be eaten at night it can't be eaten during the day bottom linear holds that Can it be eaten until how does he know that? It says and it says by so this too is eaten by says no it says it's you haven't told the morning I what's bala emphasis of is opposed to the day before which as we spoke at what we learned that's a very big says the bottom line the says clearly that the was only must be going know maybe when the Mishna says that the carbon was only it means meaning maybe really the going that holds that the carbon was eaten the whole night the says it's going to it's only to make sure just like we saw with other carbonas that you could eat it the whole night we say don't eat pass like you could do it in the whole night. The first mission of you should do it before. So maybe so says it says what does mean only the emphasis is it's like the other things mentioned in the Mishna that it's only and it could only be and just like those things are so the concludes with a classic what is this of the carbon is it up until or could it really be eaten the whole night? This was the he brings from his who said that the reason there's a mic to say every morning really all we're trying to do is say you want a little mikra a little for those that don't learn. So if the whole point is just to just the same then why is said it's because in there's no said that's why because this was father there is a mentions clearly said in theory so he said must be because it doesn't mention a in the but the bottom line is is that the is going to of you have the whole night to eat it. speaks out right here that from the fact that the Mishna brought it would seem to suggest that and that the was to eat the carbon after before but after you couldn't eat from the carbon anymore it's a huge but it's also very why is it because we eat the by the as the carbon that the matzah the matzah that we eat by is not even in the mitzvah matas that's the first matzah that we eat that's the matzah that we make the matzah on so why do we eat another mat at the end of the sedar that's the carbon was a to the carbon p that's why has to be just like the carbon had to be so what's this according that the carbon had to be eaten before So also has to be eaten before that the could be eaten then the could also be eaten the entire night. We have to know what tal is. is like or is like and it's a and being that it's a who is like it's for that reason the is we go and therefore we make sure to eat before the reason we eat is that is like the we just learned like that before that means also has to eat before would be like that you had the whole night like those then you'd have the whole But we don't know we can't be between the so we go and that's why we eat before but it's because of the fact that really it's not clear whether or like that was a very very famous for those that want to pra and they don't want to be dumb you know with already before he said I have What was the first his and then the methodology of how he came about his was that right before you're middle of the stop take a matzah eat it and before you eat it make it tonight and you should say as follows if that the cover had to be eaten before which means also has to be eaten before so this that I'm eating right now this matzah should be after you can continue your suda. You can eat, you can do whatever you want and you should say if the is like that the does not have to be eaten before. So this is just another matzah. I'm not eating a and then when you finish your your say at 3:00 in the morning then you eat a and it's not going to be a problem. In other words, the that was saying was is that although we know you're not allowed to eat after the but that's only if you're going to eat during this that you could eat the or during that you can eat the carbon meaning if it's within this carbon once I ate the carbon p I couldn't eat anymore which today translates as once I eat the I But being that the whole the whole idea that you shouldn't eat the after is because might be like who holds the carbon can only be eaten up until so the whole of not eating after the not eating after the would be up until that but once passes at that point it's not going to be an issue anymore. So he said I could eat after like so just eat your coming before you're right up in from the I can't eat but once passes I don't have a problem anymore because it's not this anymore being it's not anymore there's no eating after the carbon and according to you have the whole night to do it anyway said it's an I don't see any reason that it shouldn't work now the was really twofold the way the says over the was because he held in that it made sense that the whole is to eat after the is only within this man that you could whole is to eat after the garb was only within this you can eat the garb. So if according to the that holds you have to eat it before. So this man is up until up until you can't eat after the up until you can't eat after it's not anymore. It's not what just like the next day you could eat. Why? Because what is you can never eat after no it means within that was held in but he said I'm going to prove it to you is in ask what's the carbon was only he learned it from it says and that was so too it says here means what did what did mean by makar It meant that happened at the moment of so if we're going to learn this carbon then the right way to learn this is that just like happened at so at not up until didn't happen up it didn't start at and end at happened at the moment of so if that's the we just learned to gar this minute and this is the macar it's one So the the right lim would be that just like happened at the moment every to be looking at his clock just like you watch your clock morning. So you should have to watch your clock at the lea the second comes that you have to think it's not possible because at the end of the day it takes time to eat and you can eat it like a briska as fast as possible swallow it and chew it in one second. It's still hard. So at the bottom line you can't do it at that moment. So there's no way we can do it and being that there's no way we can do it. SO IT SAYS THAT MUST be knew that the gill of wasn't at the moment of but rather the gill of was the gill of was just be done with it by but wasn't comfortable with that says I think a little bit differently I think that is what's the then the is that when it comes you should have already eaten the carbon but then is the I'll tell you a little bit better that When comes at the very least you should have the T of the carbon in your mouth or today when comes at the very least you should have the T of the in your mouth. That's what it means because not up until now it's not possible to do is true but you still have to be the and you know how you do that by having the time of of the carbon in your mouth when the moment of comes by having the in your mouth at the moment comes says that's the you know why you don't eat after the because you want that when comes you should have the matzah because that was the if that's the case it's that the whole issue of eating after the is only until but once passes it's going to be a brah anymore because the holy sight of eating after it's not you can't eat you can't eat milk and meat you can't eat after the what does that mean no it's much deeper than that what it means is you don't eat after the you want comes what once upon a time was at the moment the makas YOU SHOULD TASTE MATZAH YOU SHOULDN'T TASTE DESSERT. YOU SHOULDN'T TASTE some you should taste. That's the idea. So if that's the idea is only at the moment once passes it doesn't matter and that was based on that he came up with tonight eat it before don't eat anything between you could eat you already had the there's no problems you can finish the sud have the whole 19 anyways. It's not going to be an issue. tell you something interesting in it's you want to look it up it's inv he heard that brisk used to do the patent he used to make this tonight was mim to the of the and this is something that he used to do then he brings a kasha that he heard from his bashimk We know 101 is that so for example you can't make a woman can't when she does because asai which essentially brisk also took ownership of that how could you go ahead and make a tai while you're eating matzah it is going to be and the less of that is that I'll find you other places in what you see you could do a mitzvah I'll just give you one interesting example it's the context the context is so you have the says should put on both films now the gives you a way to put both fillins on at the same time. It's based on the Gar that says in theory you could put on two pairs of fillin at the same time and the gives an how you should do it. So you should put on two pairs of fillins and I'll just read to you the at the same time when you put both on you stay like this. I don't know if this one should be the one should be the then of course when says that and that's why there's this controversy you do wear you know have to be whatever but the point is above my pag but the the point is that says that how would you do at the same time you would make it tonight how you make it tonight could you make a to put on for you it's a says He says based on where asks that you can be tonight you can't be it's says the only time you need to know when you make a tonight this is a great is if the is if it's between me and you I'm selling something to you a man and a woman I'm getting married it's a gish and so when you're doing something between two people and you make a it has to be that there's no and his because how do we know from and that was a so we learn from there that only when it's you have to confform with but if it's not It's when you're eating it's between you and when you're putting on fill in it's not it's between you and you and your obligation to fill and and being it's a question it's for that reason it's not a problem mentioned it's printed in so he brings this of the he wasn't happy with the I'll just read to you it's pretty sharp he says that you know the always was to make sure that and nobody was and his Russian is even though wrote a beautiful but it's still it's a and then he says even if it was a clear I I think it would be aesh to go the ministral of all And that is but the bottom line is was not mask to the of The ambulance.